4 ms·
For a small business owner, graffiti is an unconsented, recurring tax that provides zero ROI for the neighborhood. In SF if you own a business that gets tagged,
by toephu2 9mo ago
For a small business owner, graffiti is an unconsented, recurring tax that provides zero ROI for the neighborhood. In SF if you own a business that gets tagged, you have X number of days to clean it up yourself otherwise YOU get fined.. the city does nothing to go after the criminals. They only go after law-abiding tax paying citizens cause that's where the money is.
- rib3ye 9mo agoThis site scrapes the city efforts to document who is doing "how much" damage/art. Once they catch an artist in the act, they will use these archives to recommend a punishment. But your point in valid - San Francisco likes graffiti.
- guywithahat 9mo agoDid he argue SF likes graffiti? I don't think he does, and the people living in the city certainly don't. These are criminals tagging buildings, and city officials who either don't care or are too busy with other things. I'm not aware of anyone who actually lives there who likes graffiti, and logically there's no reason anyone should. If someone wanted a mural they would have hired a real artist to do it.
- rib3ye 9mo agoHe's arguing that the authorities aren't doing anything about it, and the reason is, (going out on a limb here) SF residents are sympathetic to the renegade artistic expression argument.
- nerdsniper 9mo agoBut not sympathetic to corporate expression via renegade spray-painting. (Justin Bieber, now ASAP Rocky) https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-city-attorney-going-after-illegal-Justin-6723893.php https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-city-attorney-goi...
- bradlys 9mo agoHated this shit in NYC too. It's a fucking blight. Nothing but people spray painting their IG handles trying to become a clout goblin. Ads everywhere. Can't even look down.
- Projectiboga 9mo agoI've lived through this whole epidemic, I remember seeing the origional modern Grafitti guy's work all over North Philly on my way to the doctor in the mid 1970s. That guy's name was CornBread. The artful mural like tagging origionating in the Bronx is another story but there have always been a-holes who tag some scribble over other stuff.
- bradlys 9mo ago> SF residents are sympathetic to the renegade artistic expression argument. SF residents are incredibly snobby when it comes to street art. The typical tagging, 2 minute stencil sprays, and so forth are not up to posh standards of SF residents. I don't think most SFers think those are "renegade artistic expression". Maybe some of folks in Berkeley would but not SF. There's a huge disconnect from the city residents and a lot of what happens by the government. SFPD is a prime example of this. Almost none of the cops live in SF. A lot of the people committing crime also don't live in SF. It's a weird city.
- jasonfarnon 9mo ago" Almost none of the cops live in SF. A lot of the people committing crime also don't live in SF " any more "It's a weird city." I think you're just seeing the transition US cities made in the 2000s from the location of the have-nots to the haves.
- secretsatan 9mo agoI think there should be distinction between tagging and graffiti
- moron4hire 9mo agoAn authorized painting on a wall is called a mural
- Projectiboga 9mo agoYes, I'm old enough to remember CornBread's scribbles all over North Philly in the 70's. I think he started the modern scribble tag.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- mothballed 9mo agoRegulating otherwise legal non-commercial speech on someone's own property is insane and sounds unconstitutional. If you want it there, or want it gone, that should be your own prerogative.
- alwa 9mo agoYour comment motivated me to read the way SF frames their regulation: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/san_francisco/latest/sf_publicworks/0-0-0-4912 https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/san_francisco/latest/s... > Graffiti. "Graffiti" means any inscription, word, figure, marking, or design that is affixed, applied, marked, etched, scratched, drawn, or painted on any building, structure, […examples…], without the consent of the owner of the property or the owner's authorized agent, and which is visible from the public right-of-way […variations…] > It shall be unlawful for the owner of any real property within the City bearing graffiti to allow the graffiti to remain on the property in violation of this Article 23. …surely they’ve thought of it already, but it does seem like that would make “yeah, but I said it was fine” a viable way out of that particular ticket, no? I am sympathetic to the way they frame their motivations: it’s not the speech itself they say they’re regulating, it’s the way your neglect signals impunity, encourages more of it, and degrades the quality of your neighbors’ lives (and property). That and gang stuff.
- mothballed 9mo agoYeah that sounds basically impossible to prove since the onus is on them to prove the negative that you never consented to it, but my guess is since it's a civil ticket it goes through some kangaroo court where you are fucked from the get go and the judge is basically the 21st century equivalent of a red-coat.
- bryanrasmussen 9mo agoOwner's authorized agent sounds like a court would expect to see some sort of paperwork authorizing the placement of the graffiti. So when you say I told them it was ok the burden of proof falls on you that you did.
- transitorykris 9mo agoTo be fair, not all graffiti on this site is non-consensual. For instance Jeremy Novy's koi fish. After living in Soma for time, everything else was a recurring pain mostly in terms of time I had to spend on it.
- chrismcb 9mo agoBy definition graffiti is non consensual. If there is consent then it is a mural.
- boarsofcanada 9mo agoThe city does go after the people illegally tagging properties: https://sfstandard.com/2024/10/17/san-francisco-prolific-graffiti-suspects-arrested/ https://sfstandard.com/2024/10/17/san-francisco-prolific-gra... https://sfdistrictattorney.org/prolific-tagger-charged-with-felony-vandalism/ https://sfdistrictattorney.org/prolific-tagger-charged-with-... https://sfist.com/2016/01/25/prolific_tagger_fined_over_200k_by/ https://sfist.com/2016/01/25/prolific_tagger_fined_over_200k... Many more results if you search for “prolific tagger San Francisco”.
- nektro 9mo agoyou should not get fined and it should not be a crime to graffiti
- WalterBright 9mo agoIf somebody tagged your car, would you be upset about it?
- Gigachad 9mo agoI think it’s fair to say the blank wall of a store is different to someone’s personal car. I am not mad about people tagging commercial walls, and I would be if someone tagged my car. Thankfully no one ever does that because they share a common agreement on this.
- WalterBright 9mo ago> I think it’s fair to say the blank wall of a store is different to someone’s personal car. I don't. Especially if it's my store. I've never heard a businessman not be angry if his place of business was vandalized. I bet you'd be angry if your house or your fence was tagged.
- Gigachad 9mo agoAgain it depends what it is. If someone tagged my bin out the front I wouldn’t care in the slightest. If they tagged a brick wall siding an alley or train line I wouldn’t care. If they jumped the fence, walked through the yard and tagged my window I would care.
- WalterBright 9mo agoSo you do care about it. And that's perfectly natural.
- nektro 9mo agojust over a month ago I had my car broken into and nearly everything in the backseat was stolen. I was for sure upset but I never called the cops over it.